Chris Matthews: Obama Should Release Birth Certificate

Even MSNBC’s pro-Obama host Chris Matthews has joined the crowd calling on the president to release his long-form birth certificate to settle the controversy surrounding his birthplace once and for all, saying “if it exists, why not put it out?”

Matthews has been critical of the so-called “birthers” who insist that Obama was not born in the United States and therefore is ineligible to be president. Some say he was actually born in Kenya, his father’s home country.

The majority of Americans discount that conspiracy theory. Hawaii state officials insist he was born on the tropical isles, and a legal ad taken out in a local newspaper announcing Obama’s birth days after he was born supports that claim.

Still, many find it interesting that Obama has continued to refuse to release his long-form birth certificate, and Obama joins just a handful of presidents who have no declared place of birth as a significant national landmark.

Read more: Chris Matthews: Obama Should Release Birth Certificate
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/Obam ... ode=B604-1

I think I just got a tingle down my leg. Chris Matthews agrees with the birthers.

Speaking of birthers....isn't interesting how the left gives everyone nicknames to marginalize them?

Birthers
Tea Baggers
NeoCons

As opposed to names like libtards RT?

It isn't that I disagree with what you wrote, mind you, it's just pretty hard to distinguish the different shades of black between your tactics and theirs.

At this point it seems like paranoid fantasy, but I have read speculation this is a maneuver to keep BO from running for a second term.

Pass the tin foil please.

residenttroll wrote: I think I just got a tingle down my leg. Chris Matthews agrees with the birthers.

Speaking of birthers....isn't interesting how the left gives everyone nicknames to marginalize them?

Birthers
Tea Baggers
NeoCons

Like I posted in an earlier thread...I think Chris has lost the tingle. Just wondering what might be running *down* Barry's leg now that his base is asking the same birth cert questions.

PrintSmith wrote: As opposed to names like libtards RT?

It isn't that I disagree with what you wrote, mind you, it's just pretty hard to distinguish the different shades of black between your tactics and theirs.

I've been called on the carpet by PrintSmith. Good job! I hear you, but do you feel the pain. For over six years, the liberals, like Looney Jerk, have consistently name called conservatives. They have portrayed the conservatives as racist, klan members and haters, etc, etc. We heard their voices about "if they controlled Congress" how the world would be better.

Well it's four years later...and the Democrat Liberals have retarded America.

So to shorten this message, the phrase "libtard" is used - not for marginalization but to describe their efforts.

For some reason it makes the hair on the back of their necks stand straight up. Why is that? Does it strike a cord of their elitist mentality? Does it strike a cord to their retarding of free market of ideas and economics? Why does "libtard" make them tingle?

residenttroll wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: As opposed to names like libtards RT?

It isn't that I disagree with what you wrote, mind you, it's just pretty hard to distinguish the different shades of black between your tactics and theirs.

I've been called on the carpet by PrintSmith. Good job! I hear you, but do you feel the pain. For over six years, the liberals, like Looney Jerk, have consistently name called conservatives. They have portrayed the conservatives as racist, klan members and haters, etc, etc. We heard their voices about "if they controlled Congress" how the world would be better.

Well it's four years later...and the Democrat Liberals have retarded America.

So to shorten this message, the phrase "libtard" is used - not for marginalization but to describe their efforts.

For some reason it makes the hair on the back of their necks stand straight up. Why is that? Does it strike a cord of their elitist mentality? Does it strike a cord to their retarding of free market of ideas and economics? Why does "libtard" make them tingle?

Um, I thought it stood for liberal retard.

BTW, you should know that liberals are too refined to call anyone names. They are just speaking truth to power. :Whistle

neptunechimney wrote:
Um, I thought it stood for liberal retard.

Hush! I didn't want to break it to the liberals in a confrontation way. I thought by giving an intellectual definition to the term, they might better accept it. Darn it!

Please RT, are not their chosen names for themselves, progressives and liberals, derisive enough on their own given the actions undertaken under the umbrella of those who choose these terms for themselves? Hillary Clinton had to resort to calling herself a progressive during the last campaign because most viewed the term liberal with the appropriate sense of disdain. And now, as in the past, the term progressive is also becoming a term with which disassociation is sought. What shall they do now? Liberal hasn't been out of use long enough to have a restored luster, and progressive has quickly lost the shine that its decades of retirement from use was originally thought to have.

Isn't is sufficient to use their own chosen terms to identify themselves to achieve the desired affect without resorting to, and lowering ones self to, the level in which name calling becomes the final refuge for the tragic failure of their ideology?

PrintSmith wrote: Please RT, are not their chosen names for themselves, progressives and liberals, derisive enough on their own given the actions undertaken under the umbrella of those who choose these terms for themselves? Hillary Clinton had to resort to calling herself a progressive during the last campaign because most viewed the term liberal with the appropriate sense of disdain. And now, as in the past, the term progressive is also becoming a term with which disassociation is sought. What shall they do now? Liberal hasn't been out of use long enough to have a restored luster, and progressive has quickly lost the shine that its decades of retirement from use was originally thought to have.

Isn't is sufficient to use their own chosen terms to identify themselves to achieve the desired affect without resorting to, and lowering ones self to, the level in which name calling becomes the final refuge for the tragic failure of their ideology?

So true, but then it wouldn't be fun to stomp on the opponent when they are down and to make sure they are out. I guess the Progressives or Liberals will need to seek a new name to describe themselves. They will probably take on a name like Progressive Conservatives.